Resolved: All constitutional rights should extend to every person in

the US regardless of their citizenship status

Affirmative ContentionsContention 1: The US constitution itself upholds the rights of people,

which includes immigrants and also protects those that are within the US’s jurisdiction (meaning the borders).

Contention 2: The supreme court has ruled in favor of the Pro argument in 3 cases: Yick Wo v. Hopkins, Wong Wing v. US, and Plyler v. Doe.

Contention 3: Contrary to popular belief, illegal Immigrants bolster the US economy through the paying of taxes.

Contention 4: Any negative effect that illegal immigrants have on the US is null and void. A negative effect from a minority group on society does not constitute the stripping of constitutional rights. (Majority rule, Minority rights)

Contention 1: The US constitution itself upholds the rights of people, which includes immigrants and also protects those that are within the US’s jurisdiction (meaning the borders).

• The US constitution uses the word “person/people” 15 times. The word citizen is used 3. A 5:1 ratio of emphasis is on the person rather than the citizen.

• The 14th amendment states specifically that no person within the US jurisdiction (borders) shall be denied the equal protection of the laws.

Definition of Jurisdiction: the extent or range of judicial, law enforcement, or other authority.

This itself explains that the US jurisdiction ends at the US border. For example, when a police officer chases a criminal, he must stop at the US border as it is his jurisdiction line. The US border is the extent of his range of authority.

Contention 2

Yick Wo v. Hopkins• 14th Amendment

applies to all persons regard to any differences of race, of color, or of nationality and to "an alien, who has entered the country, and has become subject in all respects to its jurisdiction, and a part of its population, although alleged to be illegally here.

Plyler v. Doe

• the Supreme Court struck down a Texas law prohibiting enrollment of illegal aliens in public school, the Court held, "The illegal aliens who are plaintiffs in these cases challenging the statute may claim the benefit of the Equal Protection Clause.

Wong Wing v. USit must be concluded that all persons within the territory of the United States are entitled to the protection guaranteed by [the] amendments

The supreme court has ruled in favor of the Pro argument in 3 cases: Yick Wo v. Hopkins, Wong Wing v. US, and Plyler v. Doe.

Contention 3Contrary to popular belief, illegal

Immigrants bolster the US economy through the paying of taxes.

Contention 4• The 19th amendment of the US constitution

gave voting rights to women who were not seen to have any constitutional rights.

• The 15th amendment of the US constitution gave African Americans the right to vote. Even though this decision had a negative effect on society as the entire southern economy relied on them and were not legal citizens to have rights, they were given constitutional rights anyways.

• As the precedent has been set of giving minority groups rights even with any apparent negative effect on society, so must immigrants be given this same opportunity.

Any negative effect that illegal immigrants have on the US is null and void. A negative effect from a minority group on society does not constitute the stripping of constitutional rights. (Majority rule, Minority rights)

Cross Examination (Neg)

Why We FightAfter her parents brought her to Texas from Mexico at the age eight, Veliz graduated from high school two years early as a National Merit Scholar and as her class valedictorian. She then graduated from St. Mary's University, which she attended on a full academic merit scholarship. But in 2009, she said a small driving error threatened her ability to stay in the only country she knows.